Responding to the Kyoto Protocol through forestry: A comparison of opportunities for several countries in Europe

Climate change has become an important environmental policy issue. Numerous carbon sequestration policy initiatives, potential benefits of which in environmental, economic and social terms could be substantial, are directed toward both woodland expansion and using of wood as a substitute for fossil fuels. There is a great deal of uncertainty, however, on how to define sustainability of such policies in a broadly acceptable and efficient way; how to translate sustainability requirements into policy guidelines; how to overcome market limitations and where to place biomass production in the general context of land use where contemporary agricultural change will likely be influential. On the basis of several countries from Europe (the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, Slovakia, and Ukraine) this paper highlights social and economic problems of moderating carbon emissions through afforestation. It provides an indication of whether forestry can offer a socially acceptable and a low‐cost opportunity for carbon uptake. The conclusion is that along with carbon sequestration potential, the level of land use integration and the stage of institutional development play important roles for effective implementation of climate policies. The necessity is then to link these policies with regional developments, and to back them up with adequate economic incentives, appropriate institutions and with public engagement in environmental decision‐making.